WW 296 safe in reduced rifle loads

[wv109323]

Winchesters recommendations is not to reduce this powder on magnum pistol loads. ( ,357 and .44 mag. )
I am loading for a .458 SOCOM and WW296 is the only powder that I have that seems appropiate. Is it safe to ladder some loads looking for best accuracy and function? The SOCOM is not a SAAMI cartridge so loading is " own your own ".
I would appreciate anyone with loads for a 350 gtain and WW296 in the .458 SOCOM.

[NSB]

This powder is not supposed to be “loaded down”. It doesn’t matter if it’s in a handgun or a rifle. I suggest you find another powder. Going on-line and looking for someone/anyone to give you the answer you’d like to hear isn’t a good idea. Be safe, not sorry.

[uscra112]

Try 4227 at the same charge weight. Closest option I can find in my Quickload database. No personal experience with 296 at all. That "don't down-load" caution has always put me off.

I got excellent results with LiL'Gun in my .357 Maximum, but in a Contender. Some people say Lil'Gun can cause top-strap erosion in a revolver. I wouldn't know. Charge weight would be maybe 10-12% less than your 296 load to start.

Best I can do.

If you play around much with oddball and obsolete cartridges, a copy of Quickload is almost mandatory. You can even model a cartridge that's not in their database. Only drawback I find is that they don't have performance data for the most recent powders. They of course caution that you shouldn't rely on it to calculate maximum loads, and I never do, but it's great for finding a starting load when online and paper databases fail, and for comparing powders, as I just did above.

[clearwater]

Hodgdon has load data for 458 socom.
Benchmark
CFE BLK
H322
H4198
IMR 4198
IMR 4227

Also the Hodgdon site lists loads for 357 magnum and and 44 mag rifle for both 296 and h110 with starting and max loads of a couple grains apart, so there is some reducing involved . H110 and 296 are the same powder.

[30calflash]

Years back a guy next to me at a 100 yd rifle match used it downloaded in a 308 boltgun but ended up with several hangfires while doing so.

Wouldn't recommend it from that one experience.

[Elmer Fudd]

I use a 1680 burn rate powder in the SOCOM. Shooters World markets SOCOM powder. Hodgdon's CFE BLK is similar. The 4227s are faster than these, but only a bit. A 5744 load may tickle your fancy, but that powder is often 50% more expensive than others.

Lots of folks have successfully and safely used pistol powders in rifle rounds with cast bullets. Look up "the load," which is 13.0 gr Red Dot in most military cartridges with most sizes of cast bullets. That's pretty unconventional, but also pretty successful. Not a barn burner, but functional. Seems like where you're headed, unless you download W296/H110. Then you're headed for trouble. Seek published load data for examples.

[725]

The company publishes the warning for a reason.

[wmitty]

I used a charge of 40 gr W 296 in a .375 H &H under the RCBS 37-250-FN before I was told by members here that it was not safe to download this powder. I immediately stopped using this powder for this application and I appreciate those who warned me concerning the danger. My suggestion is to find a suitable powder and save yourself possible injury.

[DougGuy]

H110/W296 calls for a minimum load density of I think 73% but I wouldn't go below 78% and the minimum could be 78%. Don't quote me on the minimum percent, look it up for yourself.

I remember reading this a good while ago and this specific piece of data is hard to find but if you look hard enough you will find the recommended minimum load density.

It also don't like a mild crimp.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

H110/W296 shouldn't be used in loads below a certain Pressure, it's difficult to ignite...and you could end up with a KA-BOOM !
So searching for loads "for best accuracy and function" in a AR, is unsafe.

[farmbif]

I concur, as long as I been reloading, h110/w296 has always had a very min to max load, and unlike other powders that could be used for let say 38 spl and the 357 mag . h110 is not one of em.

[GBertolet]

Twenty or so years ago, this was a popular powder used in CBA matches. Supposedly it performed quite well for some. It had caused some unexplained kabooms though, and fell from popularity rather quickley.

[Lloyd Smale]

ill say this. i wont argue if its safe or not. Im not a scientist im a shooter. What is fact is if you down load it you will be poor extreem spreads period because it doesnt burn consistantly without pressure. So its one powder i dont fool with for downloading. theres better powders for that. If you insist on a powder that will give you good high end velocitys and still works at reduced levels and even in rifle rounds as big as the 458 mag go and buy yourself a can of 2400. To me buying 110 for reduced loads is about like buying a 1974 3/4 ton pickup to enter a fuel mileage challenge.

[swheeler]

I never thought it was a good choice for reduced loads, too heavily deterred for good ignition. There was a guy that was shooting CBA matches with it in a 32-40 single shot if my memory serves, doing quite well it seemed, went by Frankeore or some such.

[Alferd Packer]

It fizzles in small amounts, but will roar with a casefull.

[Old Caster]

Quite a few years ago I used H110 in a 22 hornet and a 14 inch barreled contender. My accuracy was incredible with this powder and the slower I shot the bullets the more accurate it was. I don't remember the normal load but I was using down to 7.4 grains which gave me velocity around 1200 fps. If I got down to 7 grains, I would get poof loads and when it happened, I had to drive the bullet out. The ones that did fire seemed about right and all of a sudden poof. I kept it at 7.4 and shot it in competition a lot. I am pretty sure that the manufacturer knows that a bullet will sometimes stick in the barrel with reduced loads and the shooter may not realize there is a bullet in the barrel and firing another round causing a disaster.

[Duckiller]

Don't reduce it!!! 2400 for reduced loads.